Japan’s newly-created Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRA), which will be overseen by a five-person panel called the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), will reportedly begin operations on September 19. The new agency, which will employ 500 staff, replaces the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA), widely criticized for having conflicts of interest as a division of the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI), which is responsible for promoting nuclear power in Japan. Now the NRA has become highly controversial, since Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda announced that he would appoint Shunichi Tanaka to head the commission overseeing it. Tanaka was formerly deputy head of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission (JAEC), which promotes nuclear power, and four of the five commissioners have admitted that they accepted remuneration from the nuclear power industry within the last few years. Such appointments normally require Parliamentary approval, but in the wake of the controversy, and facing significant opposition in the Diet, Noda said he will make the appointments without Parliamentary approval now that the Diet is out of session. In response, anti-nuclear protesters from all walks of life have been demonstrating outside the Prime Minister’s official residence, and on Tuesday formed a human chain around the Parliament Building.

Although fishermen in Fukushima Prefecture began test-fishing 10 different types of seafood this month, including some types of crab and squid, experts are warning that further studies must be done to understand why some fish are measuring abnormally high levels of radioactive cesium that exceed the government safety limit of 100 Bq/kg. Last month, cod (which migrate long distances) captured off the cost of Aomori Prefecture measured 132.7 Bq/kg; earlier this summer, rock trout caught near Fukushima Prefecture measured 380 times the legal limit. Although oceanic radiation readings are low, some marine biologists posit that the fish are eating contaminated sandworms. They say further studies must be conducted to understand the impact of radioactivity on the food chain. (Source: NHK)

A group of scientists from the Science Council of Japan (SCJ) are advising the government via the Japan Atomic Energy Company (JAEC) to completely overhaul its nuclear waste disposal plan. Currently, the government plans to bury spent nuclear fuel 300 meters below ground, where it will need to stay for tens of thousands of years until it is no longer radioactive.

Instead, the researchers recommend storing the waste in “temporary safe storage” facilities, either above ground or underground, for up to a few hundred years—and in the meantime, actively working to develop new technology to ensure safe burial of the highly radioactive material. That technology does not exist at this point. “Based on current scientific knowledge, we cannot determine a geological formation that would be stable for hundreds of thousands of years…And thus the best possible option is temporary storage,” Harutoshi Funabashi, a scientist from Hosei University, said. “This does not mean postponing the problem irresponsibly to the future,” he added. “It is to secure time to find ways to more appropriately handle the matter.” As of now, Japan is storing 2,650 cylinders of highly radioactive vitrified waste, as well as 24,700 cylinders of spent nuclear fuel. The scientists point out that local consent is crucial in determining burial sites, but discussions on where the spent fuel should ultimately be stored have not even begun.

More than 18 months after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan’s government continues to struggle in its efforts to decontaminate radioactive homes and public areas within the evacuation zone covering 11 municipalities near the plant. Insistence by government officials that radiation zones be established before any cleanup work began has seriously hampered efforts, and now, many residents are discovering that significant earthquake damage to walls and roofs of homes is preventing workers from using high-pressure hoses to reduce radiation levels. So far, work has only begun in one city, Tamura. (Source: NHK)

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) Jointherenewablesrevolution!
says:

(Thanks for your excellent continuous updates on the disastrous situation in Japan, but please, please, please do not fall into the trap, seen constan...

(Thanks for your excellent continuous updates on the disastrous situation in Japan, but please, please, please do not fall into the trap, seen constantly in the media and often quoted by pro nuclear politicians of confusing the public by mixing up the terms
"Energy" , " Power" and "Electricity"!
Nuclear power in both the UK, and the world has never produced any more than 5% of total energy. Electricity is just one of many forms of energy used to provide part of our total energy requirements and power needs.
Too often pro nuclear media and politicians exaggerate the importance of the nuclear industry either deliberately or through ignorance, by mixing up these terms.
Media must state clearly whether they are referring to electricity or to energy needs. For example in the UK the nuclear industry at it's most productive times never produced more than 20% of our electricity, but remember electricity usage is only about 20% of our total energy usage, therefore only 4% of total energy use.
This percentage may increase if we use more electricity for transport and home heating, but even doubling or trebling the number of nuclear reactors a very slow process is going to make only very small changes to the other 96%
of our energy, mainly produced by fossil fuels.
A true mix of large, medium and small scale renewable energy technologies is already showing the way to tackle global warming in a much quicker, cleaner and cheaper way than nuclear ever could.

Post a comment

To post a comment you need to be signed in.

OPTIONAL: Register to avoid filling out forms each time you post a comment
Sign Up Here
login via Facebook or Google

(Unregistered) PCAH
says:

In Somerset the Hinkley Point nuclear site is in exactly the same pre-disaster situation which existed in Japan before the Fukushima disaster and in Ukraine before the Chernobyl disaster. Both disasters are now recognised as being caused by human error of the operators and/or the nuclear regulators. At Hinkley B there was an accident in 2009 when 8 workers had to be referred to Harwell for treatment. The site licensee claimed there had been no off-site discharges; this was not true, as subsequent increases in premature deaths and serious illnesses demonstrated. The Hinkley B AGR reactors are being operated way beyond their safe lifetime because that is the most profitable time for the owners, EDF. The AGRs are suffering from such serious faults with the graphite bricks that emergency articulated control rods are being installed. In addition, there are now faults with the fuel pins. Emergency shutdowns are happening more frequently - these are warning signals that the reactors are at continual and increasing risk of core meltdown. The nuclear regulators have the power to order the shutdown of these AGRs - why aren't the Office for Nuclear Regulation officials doing what we're paying them to do, put public safety before profit for EDF?